Previously, we have examined the subject of karma and commented upon how this concept necessarily implies an ultimately “just” universe, a “just” overseer or both. Regretfully, there is neither an indication of a benevolent universe, nor, fortunately, any evidence of a malevolent universe. Although we explicitly deny that the universe has any concern for either life, generally, or humanity, specifically, we are not without either charity or the acknowledgment of the potential of the coming into being of a just universe. We note that our “unfeeling” conclusions are based entirely on our perceptions and reasonings.

The coming into being of a just universe must serve at least one purpose- to reward certain individuals who have expressed, not through speech, but through actions, the anticipation of things inconceivable and things not seen. Clearly, from our finite observations, we can only adhere to hope. Whether their hope is misplaced, we cannot tell. However, we cannot reasonably hold to such an opinion.

It seems that justice necessitates not only rewarding “good” behavior, but the punishment of “bad” behavior. If, at the conclusion of this reality, there is no punishment, then we are placed in the difficult position of suggesting the modern idea of universalism. If the ultimate good awaits one and all, then there is no motivation, other than reason, to avoid evil and choose the good.

Without supernatural revelations, we admit that we are powerless to reach a definite conclusion regarding the ultimate consequences of certain aspects of human behavior. However, we are attracted to the belief that those individuals who gave freely of their time and gratuitously of their resources will also receive what is, by any reasonable standard of decency, their due. Although we incapable of expressing any confidence in either the idea an ultimately just universe or the coming into being of a just universe, nonetheless, we remain hopeful of a just architect, or a just craftsman or a just overseer.

The often cited karmic balance sheet supposes that at the final reconciliation, all credits are equal to all debits. In a cosmos of everything, the ultimate value is realized as nothing; no comment is necessary. The atheistic balance sheet also reconciles to nothing, as human deeds, whether good or evil, or seen or unseen, has no value. Therefore, the final balance sheets of karma and atheism are identical. However, the occult balance sheet demonstrates the wondrous effects of the compounding of credits, known and unknown, over time and space.

In conclusion, which accounting method one prefers to accept speaks more about one's worldview than one's ability to reason.